Skip to content

Broker-Dealer Regulation & Litigation Insights

  • About Us
  • Contributors
  • Resources
  • Presentations
  • Visit the Faegre Drinker website

Bad Brokers Beware: FINRA Aims to Further Tighten the Screws on Ill-Behaved Brokers and the Firms That Employ Them

FINRA recently posted two regulatory notices aiming to further rein in so called “high risk brokers,” as well as the firms that choose to employ them. The first, Regulatory Notice 18-15, is aimed squarely at firms that employ brokers with a history of previous misconduct. It advises firms on (1) Identifying Individuals for Heightened Security and (2) Developing and Implementing a Heightened Supervision Plan for such individuals. The second, Regulatory Notice 18-16, seeks comment on a variety of FINRA rule amendments relating to “high-risk brokers and the firms that employ them.” We discuss the notices in further detail below.


These notices should not come as a surprise, as FINRA’s 2018 Priorities Letter stated that “a top priority for FINRA will continue to be identifying high-risk firms and individual brokers and mitigating the potential risks that they can pose to investors.” Nonetheless, the import of these regulatory notices is unmistakable; firms that seek to hire or continue to employ high-risk brokers can expect increased scrutiny from FINRA.

Regulatory Notice 18-15- Guidance for Firms Employing High-Risk Brokers

FINRA published this notice “to reiterate the supervisory obligations of member firms regarding associated persons with a history of past misconduct that may pose a risk to investors.” FINRA encouraged firms to adopt the practices set forth in the notice to “strengthen their own supervisory procedures.”

As stated above, firms need to employ a two-part test when dealing with high-risk brokers: (1) Figuring out what brokers need to be placed under heightened scrutiny and (2) Developing a “heightened supervision plan” for dealing with these high-risk brokers.

To help firms ascertain which brokers should be placed under heightened scrutiny, the notice provides a laundry list of criteria that firms should consider, including: “internal investigations; firm-imposed discipline; disciplinary actions; final, pending and settled arbitrations; past, open or settled customer complaints; terminations for cause; and other items disclosed on the person’s uniform registration forms.

Next, a firm should develop a written plan focused on addressing the specific broker’s “incident history.” Firms “should consider whether the nature of the concerns the associated person’s incident history raises involved a particular product, customer type or activity.” The notice also gave a non-exhaustive list of factors that the heightened supervision plan—at a minimum—should consider:

  1. Designating a principal with the appropriate training and experience to implement and enforce the plan.
  2. Requiring appropriate additional training for the associated person subject to the plan to address the nature of incidents resulting in the plan.
  3. Requiring the written acknowledgment of the heightened supervisory plan by the associated person subject to the plan and the designated supervisory principal.
  4. Periodically reviewing the heightened supervision plan to assess its effectiveness.

In addition to these suggested minimum requirements, FINRA also suggested that the heightened security plan could include: expediting the handling of customer complaints related to the associated person; more frequent review of the associated person’s communications, particularly with customers; and proximity of the supervisor to the associated person.
Simply put, firms choosing not to implement these guidelines will do so at their own peril, as the notice makes clear that a firm’s failure to implement these guidelines will be “closely evaluated” in determining whether the firm itself would be subject to disciplinary action.

Regulatory Notice 18-16- FINRA Requests Comment on Rule Amendments Relating to High-Risk Brokers and the Firms that Employ them

In line with its 2018 priorities letter, FINRA has proposed amending multiple rules that seek to impose additional restrictions on high-risk brokers and the firms that employ them. FINRA seeks comment on these amendments by June 29, 2018. The below chart indicates the rule being amended, as well as the substance of the amendment.

Proposed Rule Amendment Description of Amendment
Rule 9200 Series
(Disciplinary
Proceedings)
Rule 9285 (Interim Orders While on Appeal)

A. Rule 9285(a)

  • Would allow the Hearing Panel, Extended Hearing Panel and Hearing Officer to impose conditions or restrictions on the activities of a broker as the hearing panel or officer “considers reasonably necessary for the purpose of preventing customer harm.”

B. Rule 9285(b)
Would establish an expedited review process to allow a broker that had conditions or restrictions imposed on them to file a motion with the Review Subcommittee of the NAC to modify or remove restrictions.

  • Broker would need to show the conditions are not reasonably necessary to prevent customer harm.
  • FINRA’s Department of Enforcement would have five days to oppose Respondent’s motion.

C. Rule 9285(c)

  • Requires any firm that the broker is associated with to adopt a written plan of heightened supervision if any party appeals a Hearing panel or Hearing officer decision.
  • he member firm would specifically need to “implement tailored supervisory procedures that are reasonably designed to prevent or detect a reoccurrence of the violations found.”
  • The heightened supervision plan would need to comply with Rule 3110.
Rule 9520 Series (Eligibility Proceedings) Rule 9523 (Acceptance of Member Regulation Recommendations and Supervisory Plans by Consent Pursuant to SEA Rule 19h-1

  • A member firm would need to immediately place an individual on an interim heightened supervision plan once a statutory disqualification application is filed.
  • The interim plan must be tailored to the specific individual and “must take into account the nature of the disqualification, the nature of the firm’s business, the disqualified person’s current and proposed activities at the firm, and the qualifications of the supervisor.”
Rule 8312 (FINRA Broker Check Disclosure)
  • Requiring firms to disclose their status as a “taping firm” under Rule 3170.
  • Specifically, a member firm that hires a certain percentage of registered persons from disciplined firms “is designated as a taping firm and must establish, maintain, and enforce special written procedures for supervising the telemarketing activities of all registered persons.”
  • The Disciplined Firm List is published by FINRA pursuant to Rule 3170.
NASD Rule 1010 Series (MAP Rules)
  • In general, FINRA is proposing amendments to the MAP (member application and processing) rules to impose additional obligations on member firms whose associated persons have, in the last five years, either: (1) one or more final criminal matters or (2) two or more specified risk events.
  • The amendments would permit FINRA to “potentially restrict or deny a member firm from allowing such a person to become an owner, control person, principal or registered person.”

The material contained in this communication is informational, general in nature and does not constitute legal advice. The material contained in this communication should not be relied upon or used without consulting a lawyer to consider your specific circumstances. This communication was published on the date specified and may not include any changes in the topics, laws, rules or regulations covered. Receipt of this communication does not establish an attorney-client relationship. In some jurisdictions, this communication may be considered attorney advertising.

Subscribe and Receive Alerts to New Articles

SUBSCRIBE
May 30, 2018
Written by: Edward J. Scarillo and Jamie L. Helman
Category: FINRA 2018 Annual Regulatory and Examination Priorities Letter
Tags: FINRA 9285, FINRA Regulatory Notice 18-15, FINRA Regulatory Notice 18-16, FINRA Rule 8312, FINRA Rule 9523

Post navigation

Previous Previous post: Old Standard, New Day: The Death of the Fiduciary Rule Doesn’t Mean That Broker-Dealers Won’t be Fiduciaries
Next Next post: Why Fiduciary Status Still Matters in a Post-Fiduciary Rule World: A Look at Prohibited Transactions And Compensation

Subscribe to Alerts

Recent Posts

  • Managing IRAs: Charging Different Fees for Different Investments
  • FINRA Is Conducting a Targeted Exam of “Crypto Assets”
  • Recent State Fiduciary and Best Interest Developments
  • Rollover Recommendations – Do the SEC and DOL Requirements Align?
  • Broker-Dealer Regulation & Litigation Digest – Summer 2022

Categories

  • 12b-1 Fees
  • 3270
  • 3280
  • 3290
  • Anti-Money Laundering
  • Arbitration
  • BD
  • Best Execution
  • Best Interest Contract Exemption
  • Best Interest Standard of Care
  • Business Continuity Planning
  • Churning
  • Class Certification
  • Compensation Issues
  • Compliance
  • Concurrent jurisdiction
  • Conflicts of Interest
  • Congress
  • Covered class actions
  • Covered securities
  • Credit
  • Cryptocurrencies
  • Customer Due Diligence Rule
  • Customer Protection
  • Cybersecurity
  • Dark Pools
  • Data Integrity
  • DOL Fiduciary Rule
  • Elder Abuse
  • Enforcement
  • Event Study
  • Examination
  • Exchange-Traded Funds (“ETF”)
  • exemptions
  • Fair Pricing
  • Fees
  • Fiduciary
  • Fiduciary Duty
  • Financial Services
  • FinCEN
  • FINRA
  • FINRA 2018 Annual Regulatory and Examination Priorities Letter
  • FINRA 360
  • FINRA Code of Arbitration Procedure 12204
  • FINRA Code of Arbitration Procedure 13204
  • FINRA Notice 13-45
  • FINRA Regulatory Notice 16-25
  • FINRA Rule 12200
  • FINRA Rule 13200
  • FINRA Rule 2111
  • FINRA Rule 2165
  • FINRA Rule 2232
  • FINRA Rule 3310(c)
  • FINRA Rule 4210
  • FINRA Rule 4512
  • FINRA Summary Report
  • Fixed Income
  • Fraud
  • Goldman v. City of Reno, 747 F.3d 733(2014)
  • Goldman v. Golden Empire Schools Financing, 767 F.3d 210(2014)
  • IA
  • Impartial Conduct Standards
  • In the Matter of Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, Respondent (AWC 2009020188101/January 25, 2012)
  • Initial Coin Offerings
  • Investment Recommendation
  • Investor
  • IRA
  • Liquidity
  • Manipulation
  • Margin
  • Market Access
  • Market Access Controls
  • Mortgage
  • Mutual Funds
  • New FINRA Rule
  • OCIE
  • Office of the Solicitor General
  • Options
  • Outside Activities
  • Outside Business Activities (“OBA”)
  • Policies and Procedures
  • Price Impact
  • Private Securities Transactions (“PST”)
  • Private Securities Transactions of an Associated Person”
  • Prohibited Transactions
  • Prudence
  • Quantitative Suitability
  • Reading Health v. JP Morgan, No. 16-4234 (3d Cir. Aug. 7, 2018)
  • Reasonable Fees
  • Recommendation
  • Regulation Best Interest
  • Regulation SHO
  • Regulatory Notice 18-13
  • Retirement Account
  • Risk
  • Rollovers
  • SEC
  • SEC 2018 National Exam Program Examination Priorities
  • SEC Reg BI
  • SEC RIA Interpretation
  • Securities Act of 1933
  • Securities Class Action
  • Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 (SLUSA)
  • Senior Safe Act
  • Seniors
  • Service Providers
  • Short Sales
  • Suitability
  • supervision
  • Supreme Court
  • Surveillance
  • Technology Governance
  • UBS v. Carilion Clinic, 706 F.3d 319(2013)
  • Uncategorized
  • Unit Investment Trusts (“UIT”)
  • Verification of Assets and Liabilities

archives

  • 2023
    • January 2023
  • 2022
    • December 2022
    • November 2022
    • October 2022
    • September 2022
    • August 2022
    • July 2022
    • May 2022
    • April 2022
    • March 2022
    • February 2022
    • January 2022
  • 2021
    • December 2021
    • November 2021
    • October 2021
    • August 2021
    • July 2021
    • May 2021
    • April 2021
    • March 2021
    • February 2021
    • January 2021
  • 2020
    • December 2020
    • November 2020
    • October 2020
    • September 2020
    • August 2020
    • July 2020
    • June 2020
    • May 2020
    • April 2020
    • March 2020
    • February 2020
    • January 2020
  • 2019
    • December 2019
    • November 2019
    • October 2019
    • September 2019
    • August 2019
    • July 2019
    • June 2019
    • May 2019
    • April 2019
    • March 2019
    • February 2019
    • January 2019
  • 2018
    • December 2018
    • October 2018
    • September 2018
    • August 2018
    • July 2018
    • June 2018
    • May 2018
    • April 2018
    • March 2018
    • February 2018
    • January 2018
  • 2017
    • December 2017
    • November 2017
    • October 2017
  • About Us
  • Contributors
  • Resources
  • Presentations
  • Visit the Faegre Drinker website

© 2023 Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP. All Rights Reserved. Lawyer Advertising.
Privacy Policy

We use cookies to improve your experience with our website. By browsing our site, you are agreeing to the use of cookies. For more information about how we use cookies, please review our privacy policy and cookie policy. OK
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Non-necessary
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
SAVE & ACCEPT